Changing principles of social organisation in the Exploring Islands of Northern Lau, Fiji

..

,

1 't' j ,, H / , • ;

. ".: .. ; ~ ...

"'"'''

The L1hnry

s. u.:1.11 Srn:nc:c~ & I lununltics Di\' is ion·

Post Ofllcc Box 4 Canberra ACT 2600 Telegrams & cables N,\'rllNIV Canberra Telephone 062-49 j 111

USE OF 1HESES

This nicrofiche is supplied for purposes of private study nnd research only. Passnges from the thesis may not be copied or closely paraphrased without

the written consent of the author.

CHANGING PRINCIPLES OF SOCIAL ORGANISATION IN THE

EXPLORING ISLANDS OF NORTHERN LAU, FIJT

Michael A.H.B* Walter

Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of tho

requirements for tho degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Australian National University

Except where otherwise acknowledged in

the text, this thesis represents the

original research of the author.

i

CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS _vii

ORTHOGRAPHY _ix

CHAPTER ONE _{INTRODUCTION l}

CHAPTER TWO _{THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 19}

CHAPTER THREE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A

TRADITIONAL SOCIETY 46

CHAPTER FOUR PROBLEMS AT'l~NDANT _UPON

THE ANALYSIS OF CUSTOMARY SOCIAL

ORGANISATION IN FIJI 63

CHAPTER FIVE THE SYSTEM OF DESCENT

IN MUALEVU 70

CHAPTER SIX THE FEAST ORGANISATION

AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL OF CUSTOMARY

SOCIAL ORGANISATION 101

CHAPTER SEVEN RANK AND AGE STATUS:

LEADERSHIP AND

SUCCESSION 125

CHAPTER EIGHT RIGHTS TO LAND 168

CHAPTER NINE THE GROWTH OF INDIVIDUAL

CASH COMMITMENT AND

PRESSURE ON LAND 201

CHAPTER TEN CO-OPERATIVES IN MUALEVU:

PROGRESS AND CONSTRAINT 271

CHAPTER ELEVEN CO-OPERATION AT THE

EXPENSE OF CEREMONIAL 300

APPENDICES

l. The MUALEVU System

of Kinship 344

2.

summaries

of Selected

MUALEVU Disputos Heard

at the Enrlier Lands

commission Enquiries 373

3. 1\ 1_Maritime1 _{Disaster 377}

4.

Trnding Accountn and

Balance Shoots of Selected Co-operative

Societies for 1966-7 382

5.

Village

Sketch

Mapa

391

Tables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 FIGURES

Average Monthly Rainfall at Selected Stations in Northern Lau

Mualevu Village, 1937: Total

Member-ship of Founder-Lineage Groups

Mualevu Village, 1937: Village

Resident Membership of Founder-Lineage Groups

Mualevu Village, 1969: Total

Member-ship of the Administrative iTokatoka

Mualevu Village, 1969: Village

Resident Membership of the Administrative iTokatoka

MU.ALEVU District, 1969: Total

Membership of the Administrative iTokatoka,by Village

MUALEVU District,, 1969: Village

Resident Membership of tho

Administrative iTokatokn, by

Village

Resident, Migrated and Total

Registered Membership of

Administrative Mntaqali, by

Village

10 Year Averages for Copra Production and Prices, 1882-1961

Known Income and Store Expenditure

of Individual Households in Mualo.vu Village, 1968-9

Households Invontcrios, Mualcvu

Villn.go, 1969

Range and Price of Goods in

D.akuwaqa co-operative Store, Mualevu Village, 1969

Co-oporative Society Order to Suvo,

May 1969

Meals nnd Storo Purchases of

Scloetcd .Mun.lcvu

Uousoholds,

26 July - 10

August,

1969

I

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Al l

Al 2

Al 3

A3 1

Daily Income of Mualevu Households

from Green Copra, 25 July

-10 August, 1969

Daily Store Expenditure of Mualevu

Households, 25 July - 10 August,

1969

Population Figures, 1874-1969

Pressure on the Land Resources of Individual Mualevu Households,

1969

Background and Size of Co-operative Societies in Selected Villages Copra Production (in tons) of

Producers in Daliconi Village,

1955-1969

Employees and Wages

Price of Green and Dried copra,

1966-7

Details of Houses Built by the Societies

Actual Receipts from Copra Sales of

Society Members, 1966-7

Estimated Potential Receipts from Copra Sales through Independent

Marketing, 1966-7

Differential Between Actual and

Potential Receipts, 1966-7

Contributors and contributions to a Mualevu Wedding Meal

MUALEVU and Tokatoka Kinship Terms

MUALEVU and Tokatoka Affinal Terms

Marriages by Village, showing

Distribution of Plucc of Origin

of Spouse

MUALEVU co-operative societies'

rnvostments in the Maritime Shipping Association Limited

Diagrams 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

The Official Model of Fijian Customary Social Organisation

Founder-lines

Recruitment Possibilities

Recruitment to the Founder-Lineage Yatusawana, Mualevu Village

Recruitment through Women

Descent Group Organisation and Tabana Division, Mualevu Village, 1937

Feast Organisation, Mualevu

Village, 1937

Occupation and Office Identities of clans in Mualevu Village

The Administrative Model of Customary

Social organisation, Mualcvu Village post-1938

10 Determination of Order of Rank

11

12

Precedence

Age-Status and Succession - the

Villagers 1

Model

succession to the Position 0£

Rumasi Nndave/Tui Nadave

13 Succession to the Position of

14

15

Al l

Al 2

Al 3

~ XQE.Q.

Succ~ssion to the Position of

Tui Cikobia

succession to the Positions of

Tui Mavana and Sa~ Mualevu and

---

_{Appointments to the}

--

_Offica

-

_of

1illll

MUALEVU

Marriageability and Lateral Kinship

Distance in Mualevu

('

v

Maps Page

1 _{The Pacific}

20

2 _{The Fiji Islands}

21

3 _{The Lau Islands}

22

4 _{The Exploring Group}

24

Al 1 _{The Fiji Islands}

346

~tch Maps

1 _{Administrative Matagali Boundaries}

and Individual Coconut Groves in ;'1UALEVU District

( \3.) _{Vanua Balavu (b} Av ea}

( c) Cikobia ₁₉₃

2 _{Gardening Strategy in Matagali}

Mualevu, Mualevu Village ₂₃₈

3 _{Gardening Strategy in Matagali}

Valika, Mavana Village ₂₄₄

4 _{Gardening strategy in Matagali}

Vatulami, Mavana Village ₂₄₆

AS 1 _{Mualevu Village}

392

A5 2 _{Mavana Village}

393

A5 3 _{Daliconi Village}

394

AS 4 _{Cikobia Village}

395

P.LATES

To follow page I 1. Gusau-coverod volcanic slopes,

north of Mualovu village 62

2. Limostono country, wost of Mavuna village

II l. Fishing with a still lino 62

2. A good catch, using tho lon9 not

III Tocnn9crs~ Munlovu villa9~ 62

IV 1. Tho Chio£ 167

2. MUl\LEVU District elected

v

VI VII VIII IX

x

XI XII XIII XIV

xv

XVI XVII XVIII Ii X!X vi

1. A large cleating planted with

small yam

To follow page

270

2. crotching the large yam

1. Land short~_ cassava planted

in a coconut grove

2. Warnings against taking food

1. Cattle are excellent for weeding ...

2 . . . . if you can afford to buy them

1. Established groves on the coastal flats

2. struggling for growth on poor soils

3. 12 + year old grove yet to bear nuts

1. Uncontrolled burning ••.

2 . . . . and some of its effects

1. Typical copra dryer of the

indepen-dent producer

2. co-operative hot-air dryer, store

and sun drying ra~k~, Mualevu

village

1. Receiving a love

2. fill,~-drinking prior to the division

of the f cast

l. Tho accumulated feast 2. The division

3, The Chief's share

1. A Lauan feast in Suva= part of the

accumulated

feast •••

2 •.•. and one of the divisions

1. Yam first fruits presented to the

Wcsloyan Church,

Munlcvu

village

2. Doolina of taro cultivation - an unused taro area, Mualovu village

1. Poor man, chief

2. R:i.ch men, commoners

l. A Chiefly burn (for dry weather 'nly) 2. A

commoncr

1

_s

_{houso (doublo-storcy with}

oloctric lighting)

l. A

carpenter •••

2 •••. and his chiofly labourer

270 270 270 270 299 343 343 343 343 343 343 343

l. Fashioning an

iron

roof to n

trnditionM

343

al

ahap~,

Munlevu villago

2. Buildin9 ti conerct~-block house, Cikobin village

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My research was enabled by the grant of a

scholarship at the Department of Anthropology and

Sociology, the Australian National University, and

I am particularly grateful to the University for the

facilities which permitted me two field trips. Of

the hospitality I received in Fiji I hold charming

memories deserving far more than the formal thanks

offered here. I mention by name (and in alphabetical

order) those to whom I have had particular reason to

vii

feel grateful: Tawake Apate and Keeaya, Mr and Mrs Ray

Baker, Filipe and Taufa Bole, ~Roi Dakuna and

Elisabeti, Dr and Mrs Peter France, Mr and Mrs Gordon

Mortimore, Vili Niumataiwalu and Mere, Sarni Parrott

and Asinate, Radike and Eta Qereqeretabua, Ratu cola

Serufoama and Mate, Viliame Tukana, Jimi Vakaloloma and Tiln

and Laisa, Ratu Rupeni Vakacegu and Moala and Fani, Dr

Lindsay Verrier, Anare vuiburetu and Leba, Vilia~e

Vuiburetu and Adi Luveluve, and Joeli Yaboni and Kolo.

Most official were extremely patient and

helpful in aiding my enquiries even to the extent of

making available unrequested office space. Where it

was not possible for me to see actual records, I was

invariably supplied with the information that I wa$

seeking. I should like to thank the officials of the

Department of Agriculture, the Department of co-op~ratives,

the Fijian Development Fund and the Fijian Development

Bunk for tho substantial assistance they have rendered.

I must tescrve my 9reat~st appreciation for the kindr1oss

and understanding shown to me by the members of the

Nativa. Lands commission Office - u bowl of 'grog',

an offiee, nnd material from th~ archives willingly mada

availablo mad-0 it p~saiblc for mo to socuro a maximum

viii

My debt to my wife, Elahe Fatimeh, has been

great, in a sense much ~reater than I had ever expected.

She very quickly adapted to village life and as quickly

learned Fijian and proved herself an able, competant

and full-time assistant to me in the field. Her

assistance, however, extended beyond the field when

at a cri~ical time she voluntered to complete the taGk

of typing the thesis.

I wish to thank Paul Alexander, Professor

J.A. Barnes, Professor A.L. Epstein, Dr T.S. Epstein

and Dr A. Strathern for their comme11ts on earlier

drafts of some of the chapters. The time and discussion

which Dr G. Wijeyewardene has ever been ready t.o offer

me has been much appreciated. Keith Mitchell drew the

maps and sketch maps (apart from Map 1) and Helon Dev:i:nc

and Max Rimoldi helped with the diagrams. Hel~n Devino,

Qaiyum and Shafiqa Rafiqi., Max Rimoldi and Tony Vu.le all

helped with the onerous work of proof-reading. Mrs l")o.mcln

Fox and Mrs Dorothy Aune la ~\ss istcd in the typing of tho

ORTHOGRAPHY

Throughout the thesis the 'Missionary'

system is employed except for the phonetic spelling

of 'Tonga' (i.e. instead of Toga). Pronounciation

is as follows:

B is pronounced 'MB' as in 1

number1

c

is pronounced 'TH' as in 'that•

D is pronounced 'ND' as in 'end'

G is pronounced 'NG' as in 'sing'

Q _{is pronounced 'NG' as in 'finger•}

In practically all Fijian words the accent is on the penultimate syllable.

CHAPTER ONE

1

E.K. Fisk's study, 'The Politic~l Economy of

Independent Fiji' ,1 was, in the euphoria of approaching

.independence, a timely warning to Fiji's leaders of the

dangers inhering in an economic policy that made increase

in national income an end in itself iegardless of the social and political milieu. _{There is nothing complex in Fisk's}

•

appraisal of the Fijian situation. It is a simple, direct,

common-sense ap~:noach which insists that in. a plural

society such as Fiji's, the widely differentiated

involve-ment

ot'

ethnic groups in the advanced (monetary) sector

of the economy should be the prime factor in the ordering

of priorities of economic objectives. Any concept of

economic advancement that ignores this could only be

advancement into an ever deepening shadow of political and racial strife.

The proposals Fisk makes are, in sum, aimed at

obscuring the ethnic divisions of Fiji society by providing

a foundation for the classical class framework of common

economic interests. The hidden premise is that class

conflict, stil~ hindered to some extent by cross-cuttihg cultural affiniti~s, is less likely to traumatise the

new state than racial hostility. The experiences of Guyana,

Mauritius and more recently Malaysia, the new states.most

often compared with Fiji when its multi-ethnic ch:racter

is discussed, suggest this is well ·founded, thougn Fisk,

himself, exhibits an optimistic faith in the rationality

of economic man which in another context he gives warning

1

against (op.cit. 58). _{However, with any ,~lternative so}

full of the menace of internecine strife tbe optimism

justifies itself.1

Of the existing obsta(:les to the .imploment.d. ti on

of his proposals, Fisk clearly sees the position of Uu11

indigenous Fijian community us prcsentin9 the gr ca t.ost

difficulties. A minority, but a large minority, in lhPir

native land, the Fijians are the least diversified

2 economically, the least committed to a ~-:iash f!conomy.

For Fisk, the principal cause is tho ~ffluenuo of the

Fijians' subsistence economy togctho1 with the security

of a tradi ticmul Wuy of life; it helps enl]andor:

1

For all pructicnl purposes tho subs is tou~·o acct~)r,

howovor affluant, is ossontiully etdqnant. Tho economic advancement of tho Fijians thurofore is confinod to that relatively smaller part of ~heir

nctivi tics that reaches out into tho exchm1qc.~

sector. It is for this reason thnt, whilat tho

othor :r<H·inl qroups in !i'ij i aro tnkin·~ pGrt. in tho vigorouo 9rowth of the advanced on..:-tor of the oeonomy, tho Pijia.ng arc boin,3 loft behind, nnd tho more r:n.pid the rnt.o of 9rmvth "-whieved, tho more rap1dlv will tho PqiLltUJ fa.11 liohind. (op.eit~46).

Tho coed of n clews c:omroun1 t;~t 1Nns lf:h.or'ornod by some

·it.norvcro .in the diuL~ont.cnt of 1''ij13n and Indian oil

i .. orkero that lad to the Suva !Uoto e1f 1".HU (v. Went l:JuO: Nayrlcakalt;u: 1963) thmt,Jh tho riots thm:~oolveo nu.9ht bo torrncd rae1ul in Lhat thoy ~ore auoont1ally an attack on

Eu rotrnnn property - u luot .. iniJ oht>ek for that ~ornmmu t}·.

O'ur Urn off'it:inl toport on tho rHJto

v.

Lmvo:1960). Moro recently the uctivitv uf the tdt"pott anu G<Jteitinc1 Workcto Union (nmv daro,J ~nt.etod), onpce1nll1'• Ui i.t8 prolonged

,Jigputo t·,ith QANTAS, r:ould Lo t'c'.)ardctl nn a. hoalthi-' Gi\JH

of an cmbrycm1e clauo otruettu.·c. Not am:;Jtu1,dllV i t t .. au rcF;ardcd no .:lnythirnJ t~H 1

hoalt.h1t'' by Uw Go~·c:rLment, domn~at.cd

n•uN:n .. eGlly b~/ Pi Hann and leJ bV h 1<'.';h""t'nnk s P1 jinn di 10£0.

T!iio, in rrut, l'i..)''1.,,'J.l:J the ,Jder'.'';! i i t ' tho l'.:tJliSOt'Vll.tPJCT,

"htcfl~t lPad(;tu. !~n' tieaU, t_t,t":' !i,aV"J e~·e1;.~thutq to lm10 U'/

~hi eto~1t icft c•f u.n r.,r ... u~ •1neH.:t)/ erwu;.Jqcd }p~' Pick and nthern.

F~ "~~ £•l':c ,,, dc;r'. t ··

11~[. ~r~"~ '-tJ

~ • ilaut~\."U

Fisk advocates that as far as the Fijian community is

concerned the objective of economic policy should be a

drastic re-orientation of Fijian attitudes, not only

3

to vitalise the Fijian sector of the rural economy, but

also to involve Fijians on a permanent basis in secondary

and tertiary industries and encourage their more effective urbanisation.

Prognostications such as~thesc of Fisk, of

the dangers that await Fiji if planning for at lo.:ist a

degree of economic integration of .i n<1i~3cmous Fij ii..u1s

with the res!: of tbe community is i~mored, nr1; not ne-w.

On tho other hand their history is short.

From the inception of British rule (in 1874)

policy has been to govern the Fijians as <:1 scp,::u::u. te

administrative unit, presorvin~ L o culturnl values and

institutions of a traditional Fijian 'W~Y of life, thnt

is as interpreted by tho colonial power. 'l1his policy

naturally fnvourod insulating thu FiJian from tho

tradition-vitiating experiences of contact with a

cash-oricntcdt outside world (itself introduced into Fiji,

it should be ronmrkod, by Europouns). Until tho 1950s

this ndministrativo structure and quasi-traditional

version of Fijian society went un~riticiood by commontatora.

Indeed it was laudod.1 Thero was no query to the

vnlidity and implications c>f such conelnsions as, for

example, thooc of Geddes' rc~~rding the villagers of Daubaa

2 ( eont 1 _{d from previous paqo)}

~~eonomie1lly Activo Population by Raeial G1:oup and Main

4

'And, in the meantime, their state as reviewed here is

a fortunate one in a world in which individualism and

aggression so often over-ride human values.' (Geddes:

1945:6S). Moreover, as a corollary, and in a magnificent

confusion of cause and effect, the high rate of failure

of those attempts by Fijians to become involved in c'-'tsh

enterprises was put down to an innate conservatism in

the Fiji~n. His was a custom-bound outlook determined

by the need of chiefly leadership, by the priority of

kinship obligation, by an addiction to the 'communal

1

system' of life in the village.

The first effective criticism of the Fijian

establishment came in 1959 with the publication of

Spate's official report 'The Fijian People: Economic

Problems and Prospects' (Spate:1959). Compnxcd with

past eulogies, Spate's approach was ruthless in the

way it:. nt:rippcd nnd laid bare the plisrht t)f tho captive

1

In the Fijian literature, the term is most often used

in a very loose way to denote a kind of ethos or way •

of life in the village. It seems to reflect more

faithfully past official notions of what life in the

village should be, notions which \vcrc duly in~orporntcd

into the administrative policy. This .:~ommunal othos

is boat convcyod by tho idea of tho subeorvionco of tho individual's time and labour, his productivity,

to the intarcnts of tho community. The vagucncrns of

i ta praeisa chu.rnctor, hol..vovor, h ets lad to much

mis-undorst:unding - epitomised for mo by tbo ulurh for a

1968

Australian

tclavioion

production

on rurnl Fiji

life which commenced \vi t~. tho pronounccmcmt that n.11

property ia hold in common in tho li'i i iu.n villa.go.

Belshn.w1 inn chapt0r honclm1 'Tho Arnui1Juity of Communalism'

l,i

Fijian villager treading the revolving wheel of his

'Fiji.an way of life' .1 A 'Commission of Enquiry

into the Natural Resources and Population Trends of

the Colony of Fiji' (Burns:l960} quickly followed on

the heels of Spate and, within the limits of its terms 5

of reference, its proposals fully endorsed and suppo1ted

his conclusions. Though the most important of these

proposals were immediately rejected or their

implementat-ion postponed (v. F.L.CaP .. No. 31 of 1960) 2 , the officL1l

and chiefly representation of the n.::1ture of Fijian

rural society clearly lay considerably compromised

under

the impact of these two officially initiated reports.

Further assaults follmvcd. Most notable nmonJ them wns

Belshaw 1

s 'Under the !vi Tree' ( 19 64} , an cx:am:i.nation

of Fijian economic enterprise in the Sigatoka region of

south-west Viti Levu. More recently there has appcilrcd

the geographer Wattors' comparative study of four

villages in different nrcus of Fiji (Wuttcrs:l9b9) . 3

These shocks to tho systom from the observations

of outsitlo exports could not fnil to bring ~bout some

re-appraisal of tho rolcv~ncc of tho administratively

maintained institutional framework of Pijian rurul

society, not only by colonial off1ciuls but by tho

Fi;ian chiefly leadership. Furthermore, i.h.u:itH] the 1960s

the internal political situation \].tu\.,: more tense with

the ever-widening gap botwcon tho dumi.lm:ls of the loaders

of tho majority Indian community and the conearvntivc

A reference to the titla of G.K. R0th'a buok {1953).

2

Fiji Lcyislativo council Papo1.

3

Chcmon by Watt.or~ to re1n:cmont different lcvolt:> \Ji'

c.i;'.'.'ul'l.t:';)mH~ uovelopmont and tJ1.)eL1l change (op.cit. xv).

W<.lttcrn main f.icldt·.,prk tv,1s carried out in 1959 nnd 1959 \vith

further hr1t:f rn:ri,Ydu Ht !f!1,i, 19t>4 cmd 19tHJ. Bnlghmv'o

\

stand of the Fijian lead,rs. As the prospect of

independence became a r -~,, l ! • an: :.· ,t:. merely a

plat-form for Indian orators, tl. ~· ,, ia·: leadership was

6

obliged to consider a post-~ !dep1ndence situation in ~hich

an Indian-dominated administration might come to power

and 'liberate' the Fijian community by legislation.

Thus the economic plight of the Fijian villager, brought

to light by such ~tudies as those of Spute and Belshaw,

had an immediate political significance for the vested

interests of the established system of leadership of

the Fijian community. It wds a significance of some

ominous proportion for them when vi-ewcd in the light

of the small but increasing degree of organised activity,

political and economic, of those urbu.nised Fijians who

had shaken off traditional leadership and direction.1

Within a few years of its unfavourable reception

of the Burns proposals of r~form, Fijian chiefly

leader-ship had accepted the need to dismantle the separate

Fijian administrative framework. Administratively the

foundatiomwere laid for an eventual single system of

local government with the creation of elected provincial

councils. 2 Economically the habiiitation of tho rural

l

A feature of political life in the Colony in the 1960s

has been the ability 0£ tho main Indian opposition party,

the Federation Party, to attruct GUPt,,ort frum tho u:rbnninod

Fijian sector of the population. Tho National Party, the

largest of the minor indigenous Fijian political parties,

formally umalgama·tcd with the Pedm:ation Party in 1968.

i:t\vo hi~h officials in the Nutionnl Fcdoration Party

organisation nro £rom sonior chiefly Fijian families.

2

Fijian Affairs {Provincial councils) RctJUlntions of 29th July 1966. Tho councils were not completely oloctivc,

provision boing made for t:.ho ncmimition of chiefs b~, the

scerotary for Fijian

Affairs -

in tho Lauan Provincial

council, fox· r::.:amplu, there tvuro 14 clcet.otl members und 4

7

Fijian community was spearheaded by increased emphasis

on the development of the Co-operative movement and

community schemes, while the ecc~omic awareness and

growth thus achieved came to be regarded as the

foundation of a kind of village self-help approach

through communal projects 'enabling the local community,

from its growin3 resources, to strengthen and enrich its

own social provision, in education and housing and health

and recreation - in a word, to develop itself.' (From

the official report on r~i:al development, v. Hunter:l969:

cap.57.)

In itself this acceptance of the political

and economic realities of the need to identify the

rural Fijian community with the developing nation's

aspiration for economi~ growth, seemed to demonstrate a

real shift in attitude o~ the part of Fijinn leadership.

And yet in terms of the aims and effects of the policies

of rural development adopted, how real has been this

shift? The observations Of outside commentators, and of

many officials in Suva, are that traditional social

organisation within the village persists as tho major

obstacle to economic growth.

Against this general back9round of post 1945

developments, the Lau Islands presented an intoresting

situation for a study of socio-economia change ns well

as promising to provide further understanding of the

strength and persistence of traditional attitudes in rural

Fiji. Tho Lauans possess

u

long acquaintance with tho

coconut as n crop, reaching hack beyond the beginning c>f

this century. The coconut villug~ri a.re now among tho

richest in Fiji in terms of cash income. Their capacity

. .

. '\ ... -:;:_, ;:.;;.: . ..

.. CJ! ~!~~~ , . . ., '

\

.

.

8

villages by virtue of the compulsory cess (of F$20 per

ton) which since 1951 has been laid on all copra. Local

consumer-marketing co-operatives are firmly established

throughout the archipelago. Finally, Lauan villages

are regarded as being among the most tradition-oriented

in Fiji.

Not only did Lau seem to present for analysis

an ideal case of the persistence of traditional values

in face of economic change, it also offered the

attraction of complementing in different ways the major

examinations of socio-economid change in Fiji that had

already been made (that is up to 1967), nnmely those

of Spate (1959) and Belshaw (1964).

Both Spate und Belshaw were concerned with

the inhibitory effects on ecol'tomic growth of the

Fijian institutional frnmowork, traditional and

adminis-trative, as a factor in the Fijian's ability to adupt

to now sots of values and rntionnliso his behaviour

to-wards the attainment of cash-oi:ientod goals. Spate,

obliged by circumstances to sacrifice depth for breadth,

ranged widely, sampling villa.gos nlmost throughout tho

colony. 1 Among the arcns ho did not visit w<Jrc the

Moalan Group and the Lau Islands. Belshaw, on tho other

hand, localised his fieldwork, concentrating it ~ithin

tho a~.°l.t1inistrntive Province of Nadroga & Nuvosa and for

tho most part in areas link.Gd to markets by road and

river communication. Uoro tho wide range of emergent

ontorprisas, attcndod with varying dogroca of euccoes

l

For a quick reference to spate1_{a field vieits soc tho}

"'~ ·~~.. ... . '

~' ~~~:f1J~f~~ • ' I ~

9

and lack of success, provided him with an abundance of

comparative material for determination of the variables

involved in the Fijians' adjustment to economic changes.

While the studies of Belshaw and Spate relate

to customary social organisation primarily in terms

of its encumbrance of economic growth, my own approach

was intended to be, in a sense, the inverse. It would

be seeking to understand the viability of customary

social organisation, the successful incorporation of cash

resources within a framework of traditional values and

behaviour. This focus, in turn, differentiated it from

sahlins' study of Moalan society1 (Sahlins:l962) where

his emphasis reflects, in his own words, 'a greater

interest in traditional facets of Moalan culture than

in those characteristics thnt manifest n century of

European dominance. 1

(op.cit. 3).

Luu, then,

offered the possibility of a

comparative sat of mnterinl which in particular

contrasted a situation uf successful assimilation o±

E:!Conomic development \Vith the strcss-loo.dcd social

scone which Belshaw discovered not so thoroughly hiddan

behind a canvns of ooranity in Nadroga & Navosu Province.

By also oockin1 to isolate tho variables determining

tho individu~l'a adaptability in tho Lnunn situation,

it n.pponrod poss iblo not only to cmhnncc but to extend

l

Moala and islandG of 1_{.rotoya und Ma.t;uku comprise tho}

Moula.n Groupt 'Yasuyasa Moala', which in withit'i the

administrati Hi Provine?c of La.u. My own re:farcnccs to L-1u/Launn nrc to the tuunn nrehipolago

only.

Sahlins• fieldwork on Mon.lu was £rom octobar 1954 to

10

Belshaw's theoretical discussion. Furthermore, in a

more immediately applicable context, an understanding

of the social background to the establishment and working

of co-operative societies1 in Lau would be of particular

value. HBre the significant question to be answered

would be to what extent Lauan Co-operatives could be

regarded as a genuine medium of economic growth within a

traditional social framework, the kind of socio-economic

phenomenon which Pitt (1970) and Lockwood (1971)

describe for Samoa. If this was in fact so for Lau,

then in view of the high priority given the co-operative

form of enterprise in present policies of rural

develop-ment in Fiji, it is clearly important to have some idea

of the potenti.a.l for furthering this independent economic

growth of the FiJian community. This is all the mora

pressing in light of the urgency for economic integration

felt by, for example, Fisk and Watters. Making

specific comparison with Samoa, Watters (1969:2) has

commented:

1

Muny

competent observers think social change should

be nccolornt¢d in Samoa to permit much needed

economic dovolopmont. Yet the ruto t\t which Samoans

cbnngc is above all the Samoans' own business: if

thoy

should be forcod to close their schools, shut

up their hospitals and halt any or all of the

various uppurtcnuncos of u modern stutc, tho decisions arc entirely theirs. But in Fiji, al-though tho rate at which thoy change is primnrily th€! Fijians• businosD, it is not only their

buainoss: it affects tho futuro happiness and prosperity of other eommunitioo living in tho namo land. Thin doou not moan thnt I recommend

! use nn initial Cf'!)it.nl for co-oporutivon/co-opo:rut.ion

to avoid confusion. Similarly, an

initial

capital

will

bo used for •socictios• when the t.orm is used on its

own

that changes be imposed on the Fijians, but it does mean that every effort must be made to secure the acquiescence of all of them in measures that will no longer insulate society against change.

11

Belshaw rejected the village as a basic unit of study and comparison despite his original intentions of

using it. He did this when he realised the widely

varying nature of association involved in same and

different forms of enterprise he came across or heard

of. He settled instead for the individual cases of

enterprise regardless of their social basis, - whether

they were undertaken by individual, family, group or

community, - without, however, disregarding tho

environmental effects of village social organisation

(v. Belshaw:1964~24-6). _{My own interest in ti1e}

persistence of tradi~ional social organisation, together

with the absence in Lau of that wide range of emergent

enterprise with which Belshaw was dealing, did point to

the village as the appropriate unit for study. Bearing

in mind spate's warning on the diversity of Fijian

villages I resolved not to limit my attention to a single

village. In the ovent I made the Tikina, the administrative

District, which in this case reflected a much older political division, the bounds of my fieldwork.

Having

to

select an aroa

within Luu me~ns

having to choose an

island. I was influenced in

my

decision bore

by

the

location

cf

fieldwork

already

carried out

by anthropologists

in tho pnst - Hocnrt on

central

Lau,

pro-1914

(mostly on tho

island

of L.tlkoha, 1

though

he nppcnrs

to

havo visited

all thQ islands in the

archipolo.90), nnd Laura Thompson on southern Lau in th(l

c:irly 1930s (mostly on the island of t<abarn). Thouyh

l

ltuc ... n.t held tho !J"-ml of hcat1mastur at th(! scheiul in

12

there are clear advantages for the student of social

change in making a follow-up study of an area, there

exist equally obvious attractions of carrying out

fieldwork in a new, relatively unknown area. Moreover,

Lau is sufficiently homogeneous for Hocart•s and

Thompson1

s works to present useful comparative material

for a study in a fresh area. A fresh area meant, in

effect, northern Lau and a choice between the islands

of Cicia and vanua Balavu. Chance contacts in Suva

helped to decide in favour of Vanua Balavu where my

fieldwork was concentrated upon the eight villages of th e nor er11 Dis r ict, MUALEVU. th ' t ' l 2

Once I was in the field3 it was not long in becoming apparent that the image of an essentially

tradition-oriented, conservative society was an ill-fit

for MUALEVU. It was also apparent that as a consequence

my theoretical design would have to be refashioned.

The decade following the end of the Second

World War seems to have been a watershed in t;ho history

of MUALEVU following which a shift in social attitudes

and values steadily gained momentum. This change was

l

Tho presence of a large Tongan village (the origins and organisation of which hnva bean studied by the Loseings (1970)) ndjoining with the chiefly village

of tho southern District prosontod sufficient additional

complications~ including the learning of Tongan as well

as Fijian, for mo to exclude this southern ar~n from tho main body of my fieldwork.

2

cnpitnl lottorn arc usod to distinguish the District from the villngo and from the soeial unit which carry the snmo nnme.

3

A total of 19 months wua opont in the field in two periods: Soptcmbor 1967 - Soptcmbor 1968,

and

July 1969 - January

1970. Both my wife ancl I hfid nequirod a fair

t:ommnnd of tho

luniguago

by

tho nixth month.

From tho fourth month we

13

readily associated by the villagers themselves with the

individual's growing commitment to a cash income. rt

is notable that it was during this period that MUALEVU

experienced a rapid rise in the potential of cash

income from what is virtually its sole source of cash,

namely copra. This was the time, assert the villagers,

that 'the money path', isala vakailavo, began to gain

dominance over 'the traditional path', isala vakavanua

(lit. 'the path in the way of the land'}. Reconstruction

and analysis of the socio-economic organisation of the

pre-1940 society1 underlined the radical quality of the

post-1945 change. As the people themselves succinctly

put it: 'Before men were important, but now it is land

that is important.'

This is not to say that the 'traditional path'

now lies neglected and lost sight of. custom has not

been swept away overnight, but even the attenuated

version, the compromise which most villagers feel the

obligation and need to settle for, is no longer evaluated

simply in customary terms. The individual's acquaintance

with tho rationale of the cash sector has meant the

values and behaviour progrrimmed by recurrent traditional

situations have become susceptible to the results of the

moro calculated computation of immediate returns and

benefits relative to time, labour and money oxpendod.

Tho ceremonial and kinship-based, distributive economy

chaructorising MUALEVtJ society prior to 1940 hns oontractad.

l

The reconstruction was bnsod on the information of tho

oldor villagors and aided by my accoss to tho Evid~ncc

nooks of the various

Land commissions that have visitod

14

Its organisational framework is becoming increasingly

peripheral in the redeployment of resources that is

occurring under pressure from new ne~ds and opportunities

presented by the cash sector.

And yet, despite the villagers' pursuit of

'the money path' at the acknowledged expense of customary

institutions, their conversion to its tenets is not

complete. The logic they apply to countenance the

diminished efficacy of custom, itself falters as a

directive to action in the cash sector of the village

economy. The apparent paradox of economic development

and social change in MUALEVU is the mode of operation

of the Co-operative societies and its acceptance by

the majority -~ the villagers.

In MUALEVU (and elsewhere in Lau) the

co-operative works on principles which are antithetical

to any idea of the maximisation of individual income

-in the sense of maximum cash return for outlay. Tho

advantages of economy of scale to the individual aro

swallowed up in the subjection of his own interest to

that of the communal interest; he who put:.s most in is

by no moans he who tokes most out. In an economic

context, the Co-operatives have a levelling effect: but

the co-operative

has

become more than

a

form of

economic antorpriso. As the traditional socio- economic

organisation, savaged by tho values of a cash·conscious

society htrn rot.rented upon itself, the co-opcrativo has

fillod t.ho

vacatod

arcns to become now.medium of village

socio-oeonomic orgnnisntion.

Tho pnradox of the successful

establishment

of

15

interpreted not in terms of the encouragement of economic

growth and of the individual's conunitment to it, but in

terms of a new medium of social organisation that offers

the villager some resolution of the stress g~nerated

by his involvement with cash and disengagement from custom.

Or, perhaps, one should say respite, not resolution, for

the present signs in the villages are that cash demand

is increasing and, as money becomes dear, the Co-operative

is conunencing to generate its own conditions of stress.

The Co-operatives certainly represent an

interesting socio-economic development at a time of

accelerated change. This can be well illustrated by

way of Belshaw's distinction of the contexts of 'economy'

and 'economic growth'. In a discussion of the 'economic'

role of Fijian ceremonial, he conunents (1964:127) that

ceremonial custom may be considered to hinder the growth

1

of the economy since, 'by diverting resources into such

[ceremonial] uses, the growth of the resources themselves

is unduly hindered and their use for increased satisfactions

is prevented. 1 _{But the notion of economy Belshaw asserts}

( 0 p. cit. 12 6- 7) :

l

•.. strictly implies that a person or group of

persons behaves in such a way as to maximize satisfaction with minimum effort and expenditure

of resources. Marriage and allied customs have

not only resisted alien pressure ond attack, but

have inflated with the growth of wealth. We must

assume, therefore, that economic demand for such

activity is highly valued, and that resources

directed to this goal represent valid economic

judgenents in term~ of Fijian life and interests.

In the event Belshaw's conclusion is that its effect

~ • ~ • ' ~fl

..

-.

. . .

' .

16

· What is interesting about the role of the

co-operatives in MUALEVU is that here is a form of

emergent, and emphatically non-traditional, 1 enterprise

which ordinarily would be placed in the context of

'economic growth' (and, in fact, is by both Fijian

officials and economist observers), but in reality is

functioning within Belshaw's context of 1_economy1 _on

the basis of the same tenets of fulfilment and

satisfaction as Belshaw characterises for the •oconomic'

role 0f ceremonial. Thero is, moreover, a further

contrast with Belshnw's arcn1 where~ cash inflation of

ceremonial c~lsts side by side with a considerable range

of emergent ontcrpriDo. In MUALEVU ceremonial activities

havo d~indlod conoidarubly in both size and incidence

because

..

of tho villagers' roluctunco to inv~lvc thcmsalvon

in anything but the minimum cash outlay.

It is clear thut

my

origininl (prcconcaiva<l)

notions as to the <~tJmplomcntnrity of tho processes of

social

chungo

in MUALBVU with those observed by Belshaw

in Nadroga

&

Navosa Province, arc not tanublo. As fnr

.w the survival and continuin\3 rolovunco of n customary

1

Ao in other undordcvclopcd coun trios, t,hc Co•opcrn ti vos

movement wu.s wolcomo<.l in Fiji us t;hc form of CG.Sh

ontor-pr 1cc ideally suited to the 1

_c:emmmnnl

1 _cthoG

0£

tradi tionnl

nocict1t·

'rhuG

stannc.r

rcma:rko: ''!'ho communal

nystem is admirably rmit.cd to eo-opcrativc dovolopmcnt

ind tho idea appeals

atrongly

to tho

Fij1una•

(1953:228):

,i ncrics of rwsumption tvithout baeis. To ... dny it is more

,readily

rcn.liood

by the p~li~y mu.kC?ro of tho

undcr-dovolopcd

countrico, largely

by

pa1nful cxporionec, that

·co-oporntion

1

is a rolativQly

nophintieatodt ~cntorn

form o! ontorpriOQ that

hao

no inovitablo appeal in 1

aimplc1

r1ociet.ion {v. n.lnc r.~innoytn eonunontn ~·m

co ....

opcrativou in

17

socio-economic organisation is concerned, MUALEVU could

not be regarded as a tradition-bourtd society.

But there is evident another form of complementa-rity, in terms of the dilemmas and frustrations and the

stress generated in the individual as he seeks to adjust

to the pressures and demands of a cash economy, that exists by virtue of the endorsement of the kind of

conclusions r.eached by Belshaw. For contrary to the

reasons und~rlying Belshaw•s choice of Nadroga & Navosa

'.:J as an area fo-r fieldwork,Mt:JALE:Vt:T was sel€ct.ed for study

on the basis of the we-ll-s·upported· assumption of the

persistence of the traditional ethos of its society.

I hope this study of social chunge in MtJALEVU

will have a wider relevance. I am thinking here of the

general issues and problems of economic growth for

rural Fiji outlined in the earlier part of this int~o­ duction. If it only persuades some qualification of the

facile generalisations about the

innate 'traditionalism'

of the

Fijian, it will have ~chieved

n

grent deal. Thero

are two specific points which from the evidence of this

study will need reappraisal. Ono is

Fisk's

emphasis

on

the deterrent

effect

upon the Fijians' integration into

the

vague society of whnt he terms the 'affluenco

_.

of the susbsistence economy'. Tho idoa that the Fijian

who does not succeed in the town 'is meroly faced with

tha need to abandon the bright lights und to move back

to tho subsistence sector, whtu•o

,a rcmnrkably

comfortable,

secure~ ud-0guatot~ erovidad living, with

many

fewer

hours of work remains nocossibl~ j:.Q. .all' (1970:45. My

italics) • The

other is tht:l beli~f; implicit in

Co-operatives is an indication of tne value of the

movement as the spea:rheaci (if not the whole spear) of planned economic growth in the Fijian village.

The thesis falls into two discernible parts dealing with MUALEVU society from the 1860s to 1945

18

and what I shall term 'modern' MUALEVU. I give a

specific year for convenience, what is really

significant is that the decade after the end of the

Second World War

was

the period during which were

established the premises for the commitment of MUALEVU

society to a cash-oriented economy. The chronological

division is not, however, to facilitate a comparison

of a 'traditional' with a 'modern' society. Indeed,

it was the harvest of assumption and misinterpretation

which usage of the term 'traditional' bountifully yields

that has partly dictated the historical approach, since

it wn.s clear that over the past hundred years MUALEVU

society had experienced some consi<lorablc chun9cs. Much

that has been tagged 'traditional' would be more

npp~opriutaly described by 'innovatory•.

These changes had relatively small effect

un tho existing framework of socio-economic organisation

and this enables n more considered isolation of variables

nf:fcctin9 tho processes of change in the 'modern' period.

But u

further fact that I wish to underline by means of the

historical approach is that tho entantinl for tho kind

of changes taking place in MUALEVU to-day> had become

implicit in the inatitutional onfiguration ostabliohcd

by

the turn of the century. The re-orientation triggcrrcd off by the post-1945 eneh intrusion ~~e tho rcoult of a

ehangc in Qmphnsis in tho re la.ti vc priority of orgnnisa ti01Ml

featuros 0£ MUl\tEVU aoeiot~r and not tho eonscqucmec of n

violent. upheaval in a !locicty that \Vi.ls { suppooodly)

. . . ~ \ . .. .

.

,,., ~

!:{.t;H L•. g ' • J

. .

CHAPTER TWO

19

A glance at the map of Oceania (v. overleaf)1

reveals Fiji's central position in the south-west Pacific.

When the map portrays communications, the eye is straightaway

drawn to Fiji as the hub of innumerable spokes of sea and air

routes. There is no doubt that the Group fits its modern

description as the cross-roads of the area. Historically, too,

though in a different sense, Fiji has earned this description.

Invariably included in the great ethno-geographical

division of Melanesia, Fiji is yet distinctly march country

where Melanesian and Polynesian ethnic and cultural traits

meet and blend.2 In the interior of Viti Levu, the principal

island, the peoples are somatically and culturally closer to

the Mel:.:inesians while on the coastal areas and in the islands

to the east Polynesian traits are more evident. In the latter

areas ure found that complex of chiefly instit1.\tions and high

degree of social sttatification as.;;ociated with the Polynesian

culturos and these are absent in the interior of Viti Lcvu.3

Polynesian inf lucnce is most apparent in the Lauan archipelago,

the eastern boundary of tho Group (v .. Map 2~ p .. 21 ) , as a

consoquence of a long history of continuous contact, certainly

over the past three hundred years, with the sea-faring Tongans.

The Luu islands {v. Mnp 3, p.22) stretch from l7°s

in tho north (tho island of Nnitnubu) to 21°s in the south

(the Tuvann islands), u distance of soma 300 miles. In the

south, the archipelago veers towards Tongn und the southern outlier, ono-i-tuu, is, in fact, closer to tho main Tongan

l

Map l is based on Taylor:.L965:fucing p.692.

The discovery and dating of the distribution of Lapitn pot:.tory suggcnto tho Fiji mnritimc ureas wore settled by u proto-Polyncrnian race prior to nottlemcn.t in wost:. Polynesia

(v. o.g. Groubo:l9il). 3

0

0,\

l

~,

\

!

~

~ ri:.

%

"':

~

:..,,

~

...,

...

-....

a..

·~

....

C(;

.•

...

u

p '

.. ~.

.

..

\ \

?'.;

~

I

I , I

t i

..

~.

.

$

u;Ps

~

YASA'WA (]Q

n~s GROU? ~

/)

q

....

UA~':';')~

!S'S

ns0_E

"C

VlTI LEVU

• {J>s::;r.

~

,

c'.;.l

~ t • _ : t---S

IT' :e_,

~

t;~$ U'IPE

})1:010

.

-YACATA 0 QJ.lAKAGA! KORO

•

0.~Elf-l<~

W.'.;VA!A":J t',..-(:;"""\,,..f.t tr' l)

173: E

~NA:RAl

~GAu S£4

M:}Al.A ~

MOALA

GROUP

I •• _{,.Mtl:...'h'-'10} T ' " ' <'> 18'.;~

!·lap 2. The Fiji Islands

{(i>TOTOYA 0 0 l) 179°W 11°s

.

)•EX~LORING I)

.. 6GROUP

D

~

LAU

<;)

.

_1s0s

OlAKEBA GROUP _,

D

.

I? <:=>

J:ABAAA()

19°S

o~;n i LAU' r TUVANA ISJl ~ ~

!'..)

I-'

/':!)

J'""

"· ""

)p

..,., :'IC ..

f

~~LAUCALA

OAMEA';.J

NAITAUSA~

179° w

0

m1los

~-'~ooo

<""'""!,

""~

r

~AVE~) .)

\ q;, \ ) YACATA~

.J4 ~

~

EXPLORING ISLANDS KANACEA VANUA @• 1~tii1A

BALAVU ..,.,,p

NAMll\AlA II /.! !! V

SJJ5IH m MIJNIA

()MAGO 0

VATU VARA

($

40

I\ 0 R 0 KATAFAG<!.:r

\J

SH A

MAtUKU

tBO~

/':.

([J)TOTOYA

0

c:iOc1c1A

TUVUCA~

()

@JvANUA VA tu

~

KAOARA

0

•

•

0

Q MOC'E rJ O

"°'

\,J

•

23

islands than i t is to the Fijian capital, Suva. The islands

are enclosed within 180° and 178°E longitude and Derrick

gives the total sea area that they cover as 44,000 square

miles (1965:296) .1 The islands number in the huudreds but

the majority are merely outcrops of limestone ranging from

a few feet to a few miles in length. only 27 of the islands

are inhabited and they represent an aggregate land area of

132 square

milt~s

(ibid) . 2 Of the inhabited islands only two,

Lakeba and vanua Balavu, exceed 20 square miles.

With the exception of the island of Yacata in the

north-west, the entire archipelago, together with the islands

of tho Moalan group, form the administrative Province of Lau.

The Province is subdivided into 13 Districts.

There are two Districts in northern Luu. M.UALEVU

District is situated entirely within the Exploring Group of

islands {v. M.up 4, p. 24) and consists of tho northern half of the island of Vanun Balavu, tho islands of Avca and Cikobiu

and tho F1uropen.n-owned freehold island of AdelvacL Thero is a

total of eight villages in tho District. The other District,

LOMALOr.m, has ten villnges. There are seven in tho southern

hnlf of Vanua Balavu, one on the island of susui, another on

tho island of Namalutu, and ono on the island of Tuvuca which

lies

out.side

the ExplorintJ Group

u.lmost 20 miles to the south.

But LOMALOMA also includes the is ln.nds of t<:anucoa, l{et tafaga,

M.:HJO, Naituuba, Vatu Vara; an<l, within tho EXEllorin9 Group, the

iol<lnds of Yanuyat\u and Munia, all of which aro European-own.cd

frcoholds. Apart from Vatu Varu and Yanuyanut thcso islands

have aettlomcnts of Fij inn and !ntliiln labourers unu t.hoir

ocrri<;!k is in.eluding the Moalun group whieh is

..:ldm1nistrn.t-i vollf' part of Lau but lios to tho wcot of the 1.u:ehit>clugo ..

2

r

h<J.vo subtracted the aroa of tho Moalcm group from t.lm

f1qurn qivon by

Dorr1ck.

- · - D1ntr1et boundary

""""''""' n()of

• V1ttooo

l"'"'l Fmohold rand

t .. J

t""·' Loa!:Ohold lilnd

t."'.J

• Hill

0 _{L ... -t..-, • .,1 ...• .,.!* - J} "

m1!M

N

24

~ <[) .., lllt'fiftlll

/'1111c1gc•

-o·~

lilllf.!t/11

Pana.~<'

~llp 4? J'he E_xploring G£~l!P• Insl't ind.!£.t!U.m.\

25

families working the coconut plantations.

In the proceeding description I shall confine myself

to the Exploring Group end give particular attention to the

atea included within MUALEVU District.

The Exploring Group lies between 178° 42'W and

179° S'W longitude and 17° 4'S and 17° 25'S latitude. The

islands of the Group are within a large barrier reef,

approximately 75 miles in circumference, which encloses an

area of about 200 square miles. There are four principal

passages through the reef: The Tongan Passage (30 fathoms)

and the American Passage (106 fathoms) are situated in the

south-east and north-ea.st respectively and the shallower

Qilaqila and Adavaci Passages are in the north-west and west.

In the north, there is the sovu series of smaller passages

which arc avoided by the Suva-based inter-island traders.

Easily the largest island of the Explori~g Group is

Vanua Balavu with an area of 21 square miles. Regarded from

the sea, the island has the prospect of a. large land area which

bolios its long, narrow, boomerang shape (tho name mca.ns

'long land'). Its total length is about 14 miles with a

mu:umum width of throe miles. It is situated ut the western

end of tho lugoon, close to tho barrier reef. The island is

surrounded by a fringiny roof varying in width from a few to

several hundred foot: in the south it merges with tho barrier

:roof. 'rho w.:itors outside tho fringing reef abound in submerged

rooflots which make na.v1gut1on a hazard for oven small

out-bourd-motorod punts and have nccossitatod the cmpla.comon.t of

a bcucon oystcm for the guidance of lurgor vossole.

vanua DGluvu is of a

composite geological structure

comprioing both volcanics and limoo tones. 1 'l'ha two arc

1 _{T0,ehnieal dotailD of tho reek ntruaturc and goologieal}

history of the Exploring inlands can ba found H\ Ludd &

26

almost neatly separated into the southern and northern arms

of the island, though the limestone is present at the

southern tip of the island where it then disappears into the

sea to reappear as the island of Namalata. The volcanic,

southern arm is dominated by a central ridge that commences

in the. area where the two arms of the island meet and which

includes the highest peak on the island, Korobasaga (930

feet). The ridge runs the length of the southern arm in a

sweeping curve and for the most part at a height of 300 to

500 feet. In the south it rises higher to the 560 feet of

Koroniivi peak (west of Narocivo village) before meeting with

the limestone area. At intervals in its length the ridge

rises 50 or so feet to form individual peaks. Spurs emerge

on either side of this central ridge often producing their

own minor peaks. Where these spurs reach to the sea they

terminate in rounded coastal bluffs. Between the spurs are

valleys, some with permanent streams in them, many with

well-dofined water-courses which carry water only in times of exceptionally heavy rainfull.

From a distance, the central ridge and the spurs

seem to present an

easy

climb and access, but their yellowish

colour is provided by a tall (up to seven feet) indigenous,

reed-like gruss, gasau, which is extremely difficult to

penetrate without a bush knife of soma sort. Hore and there

tho monotony of the yellow is broken by small patchworks of gardens and sometimes by much larger, blackened areas, tha

result of uncontrolled burning for 9nrdon clearance. The

valleys bctwocn tho spurs, and the coastal flats into whieh

they brc><:1don, arc filled with the green of a flourishing

vogotntion which is almost cntiraly coconut palm. Mangrove

oeeurn in

a

fow shcltcrod plum~s on the custurn, windward

CC.)ast, but. iG vary much more in ov.t.denco on tho leeward Sldc

of tho 1G land.

27

~ontrasted to.the southern arm and, indeed, the dimorphism

of the two types of country, volcanic and limestone, enables

them to be instantly recognized throughout the Group. The

limestone a~ea is far more rugged and except for the occasional

rocky pinnacle is covered with a vegetation of trees and

shrub~ with extensive coconut groves in the interLor. At the

eastern end of the northern arm, the hills reach 700 feet or

more and there is a more complex pattern Qf .n.dges, peaj<s and

valleys than that found in the southern arm. Except at

vutun~i, where there is a narrow flat extending for a few

hundred yards inland, the coastal cliffs along the western

half of this northern arm drop almost perpendicularly into

the sen with u pronounced overhang near the sea surface.

There are 13 villages on Vanua Balavu. All of them

n.re sited on the coastal flats of the volcanic region. Six

are in Utu northern District, MtiALEVU, with three on either

side of the island.

The chiefly village of the District, Mualovu

(popi.1l~1tion

337) 1 is on the windward coust in u wide shallo\'/ hay ovpos1t.c n break in the fringing reef. The coastal flat,

here, stretches inland for over u quarter of a mile before

mcrginy into the lower slopes of tho valley formed by tho

vorteb1·nl spurs to tho south and no.rt.h of the v1llugo. The

hiqh central ridge with its ~..fil:!. covering dominates the

b.ickqround of t.hc village; but moving a half-m1lo south, the

ridge suddonly dips to lose than a 100 foot, and between i t

cmd u coi.lSt.Jl ridge there is a wide plain dotted with patches

of .~a~;;:,,,,l!, and scrub. ThJ.s area. hlls u. wnotolar1d uppoarunec

that dis tingu1shcs it. from the .ffi!.Sau areas Qf the lughor

a lopes. ( 'l'hc J:~i j iun t"rm, tnlun t~J.~,1 in used off ieinlly 'to

l

Population f igur~o for the villayoo of MU!\LEVU Din tr iet. n.rc

from my own consus mudo in l9u9r figuros for LOMALOMA Diatriet

ure thoGo of the 1966 ConsuG (v. Zwart:l9bB:24 ) ~

Sl(.ot~h Mlipn uf Muu.lcVU; MJ.\tat'W., D.:llit-'(Jn.i .ind Cikol;i.J

-vilLvJo~i

hutt(• Lccu in1•ludcd in ;\!Jt>cm.Hx

'.~.

J

28

denote this particular type of poor, infertile country which

is quite common on the two main islands of the Fiji Group ) .

A network of permanently flowing streams to the no.rth of the

village provides a liberal water supply which is piped from

a small concrete reservoir under pressure sufficient to serve

half a dozen tap and shower outlets in the village.

Less than a mile to the south, separated from

Mualevu by the most extensive mangrove swamp on this side

of the is land, is the small village of Boi ta.ci (population

77) . This village is in a much smaller bay than is Mualevu

and with deeply jutting headlands at both ends of the bay

and an independent coastal ridge stretcring directly behind

the village to the southern headland, there is a

claustro-phobic atmosphere which is accentuated by the cramped space

of tho village itself. There is no supply of running water

close to the village, which has to rely upon a wall and a

concrete rainwater tank, though many of the householders have

their own sma.ller, corrugated-iron water tanks ..

Two and a half miles north of Mualevu is Mavana

(population 340) , the largest village in the Exploring Group.

Although hero, as in Boitaci, village space is at a premium,

there is none of the shut-in feeling of the latter village.

Mavana is situt1tcd in a wide crescent-shnptld bay with the

ridges of two enclosing spurs curving behind and around i t

to reach up to the highest point of the island, Korobasaga.

The uniform concavity of the slope in this

pronoun-~d eurvo hints at its volcanic origin.

on

the seaward

side, a lurge part of the horizon is shut out by the bulk of

Avea island. A strcnm which rune thr0ugh the village has

been dammed to form n small, u.rtifi.:ial la.kc i11 t..:hich

women wash clothes and the children play. Water ls piped

from n small concrete

reservoir

in another stream south of

tho villn.ryt,. Mavunu suffers tho ineonvcn1cn.co of an o~tonsivo